Let's define these terms

Thank you - this kind of content is useful - why I am happy to support thru Patreon - you’ve been able to take the time to think and explain (appreciably well) a topic of importance and use in gaming. Time that I would not have, nor clarity of terms. Thanks again

Greg Smith

I enjoyed the video. Before viewing, my definitions might've varied slightly from yours, as you acknowledged and addressed up front . As you likewise addressed, several of these descriptors exist on a spectrum. This type of conversation is useful if you think your players might need to hear it before playing a campaign. No doubt we've all experienced the different types of players you describe and their impact upon the game experience.

Element Zero

4: I tend to be of the mindset that you start with a conversation. If a player is willing to change their playstyle to better work with everyone, I say give them a chance.

Treantmonk's Temple

That's a good idea, I'll do that.

Treantmonk's Temple

I think you did a great job explaining the nuances of each of the four types of players that Wikipedia's writers decided meant the same thing. To be honest, I had never even heard of a Munchkin but when you described how a Munchkin plays, I realized I played with one during my very first campaign. Our campaign ended early because nobody enjoyed playing with the Munchkin who also argued with the DM at every turn. As a fairly new player, I am very interested in optimizing any character I build. But I think it's a mistake for the min-maxer to overlook what is best for the party as a whole because D&D works best as a cooperative game. It doesn't mean that the min-maxer has to 'lower' their standards of optimizing. It's the party that is going to defeat the enemy. In my mind, that might just be the difference between the min-maxer and the optimizer. The min-maxer sees the party as individual players fighting against a common enemy. The optimizer sees the party as a cohesive whole, a unit perhaps, and though I'm relatively inexperienced compared to most of the people I play with, my observation has been that strong optimized players who play cohesively as a whole, rather than just the individual parts of a group fighting a common enemy seem more successful.

I will echo the positive responses above. For me this is such a dense topic I would lease with a short one or two Sentence definition of each type. Then go into detail the way you did. Then finish with the same four definitions. It would help distill your thoughts and drive them home.

Bryan S. Warren

A bunch of thoughts on this (or related) topics. 1) The examples given were great ones and helped with clarity. 2) Worthy of a term (and discussion) is the player who pressures the party (passively or aggressively) to do the most optimal thing in every situation. 3) Are there solutions to playing with power gamers and munchkins or are they just playing the wrong game? 4) The internet frames power gamers and munchkins as toxic players to get out of your game. Is there any value in presenting them more empathetically (I.e. isn’t it common for most players to want to feel like the best player and get the most attention, it’s just some people manage these desires better than others)?

Krakenbreath

I agree- there is a lot to be said for optimization making the game better for everyone

I would link to your Origin of the God Wizard to talk about how you prefer to make use of optimization. Not to steal the limelight but to help the other players tactically while being able to still focus on picking powerful spell options.

Basically: You point out how munchkinry can often be divorced from optimizing and min-maxing. I think power gaming is similarly divorced from it. I would consider a player who cheats and fudges dice to get the limelight to be a power gamer, even though most min-maxers/optimizer are fundamentally opposed to cheating because cheating means going against the rules which they use to make strong characters in the first place. Furthermore, you can be a power gamer regardless of your math knowledge or games mastery, you can play a monk and relish the limelight as you make a bunch of attacks and try to get lucky with stunning strikes.

I think you should mention how power gaming does not have to always take the form of weird rules interactions or questionable rules tech. I think you should point out more anti-optimizer, anti-minmaxer power gamers, for example. I feel like statistically, there are probably more power gamers who try to power game without knowing rules interactions or having system mastery, so they try to power game through magic items, maybe overpowered homebrew, or taking advantage of house rules. There can definitely be cases where the min maxing and power gaming come into conflict, where the (typical) min-maxer or optimizer would rather keep things according to the rules. I think focusing on the differences in such mindsets would be good. You often see min-maxers go the opposite directing of being power gamers when, for example, they try to give other players at the tables tips for making their characters better (welcome or not), or are disappointed if they're in party with classes like monk that are weaker than average and thus would mean they can't go all-out without hogging the spotlight.

That's a pretty good set of descriptions.